SPECIAL RIGHTS OF COASTAL STATES:

Although the Chair did not
want to have a debate on the legal rights of coastal States, this
issue pervaded the discussion. On one side, a number of delegates,
including Peru, Iceland and Indonesia, argued that coastal States
have special rights and obligations that are different from those
of distant water fishing States. Trinidad and Tobago said that the
sovereign rights of coastal States include discretionary power for
the allocation of surpluses to other States, and the terms and
conditions for conservation and management of the stocks in
question. Norway said that the coastal States have the most
expertise, experience and interest in dealing with the fisheries in
their particular regions. Distant water fishing fleets can move to
new grounds if a stock located within the adjacent high seas
becomes depleted, but the coastal State has no such alternative.
The two sides cannot be given equal footing unless they revert to
a pre-UNCLOS situation. Canada commented that coastal States have
special rights due to their special geographic situation. Coastal
States nationals suffer from discrimination since, under UNCLOS,
they must fish in the adjacent high seas under the same rules as
those nationals that fish in the EEZs. Distant water fishing fleets
are not bound by the same rules. The fact that 95% of the fishing
takes place in the EEZ does not help management, as a biological
unit should not be divided along jurisdictional limits.

On the other side, the EC, Korea and China disagreed with many of
the arguments raised on this issue. As long as coastal States
insist they have a special right, there will be a problem. Although
high seas overfishing affects EEZs, the opposite also occurs and
conservation must take place on both sides. China said that all
countries concerned have common and equal responsibilities,
obligations and interests; the different status between the high
seas and the EEZs should be recognized; and conservation,
management and exploitation of these stocks requires cooperation
from all countries.

Australia said cooperation should be based on EEZ regimes, but
should also reflect interdependence. States fishing on the high
seas need to respect the rights of coastal States and high seas
measures should not place an undue burden on coastal States or on
the resources of the EEZ. Mexico said that the interests of coastal
States and distant water fishing States should be balanced.
[Return to start of article]